tv The 11th Hour With Brian Williams MSNBC January 15, 2018 11:00pm-12:00am PST
jr. taught us. that's what he taught us to do. simply never give up. that's tonight's last word. "the 11th hour with brian williams" starts now. "the 11th hour" with brian williams starts now. tonight president donald trump defends himself against charges of racism while some republicans now try to say last week's profanity never happened. and the fight looming this week is how to keep the government running past friday. plus just hours away now from testimony of one of trump's closest former advisers, steve bannon, as news comes that longtime aide hope hicks could appear before house intel before the week is up. and is it the kiss of death or a badge of honor. the president bestowed yet another nickname on yet another enemy today. all part of "the 11th hour" just getting under way on a monday night. and as we start a new week,
good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters here in new york. day 361 of the trump administration, a day devoted, of course, to remembrance of the reverend dr. martin luther king jr., and politically the start of a critical week for this white house. the president is back in washington from florida where the firestorm ignited by racial comments as he's quoted as having made about africans and haitians at a meeting in the oval office has not died down. and tonight robert costa of the "washington post," who will join us in just a moment, is now reporting on that meeting in the oval office. white house officials and congressional aides tell the post this, quote, when president trump spoke by phone with senator richard j. durbin around 10:15 a.m. last thursday, he expressed pleasure with durbin's outline of a bipartisan immigration pact and praised the high-ranking illinois democrat's efforts. the president then asked if senator lindsey o. graham, his one-time foe turned ally was on
board, which durbin affirmed. but when they arrived at the oval office, the two senators were spiurprised to find that trump was far from ready, and he shrugged suggestions from durbin and others the president calls immigrants from other nations blank-hole countries. there are new concerns the rift over those remarks threatens to -- as well as the ability to reach any sort of a deal on immigration. last night the president was asked about the potential political fallout from this latest controversy. >> honestly, i don't think the democrats want to make a deal. i think they talk about daca. but they don't want to help the daca people. did you see what various senators in the room said about my comments?
no, i'm not a racist. i am the least racist person you have ever interviewed. that i can tell you. >> well, today senator durbin of illinois continued to stand by his account of what was said at that meeting. >> i know what happened. i stand behind every word that i said. what the president said in that meeting was so awful and so impactful on so many people that when he denied saying it, i felt duty-bound to clarify what actually happened. >> so that renewed pushback right there brought this tweet and a newly minted nickname from the president. quote, senator dicky durbin today misrepresented what was said at the daca meeting. deals can't get made when there is no trust. durbin blew daca and is hurting our military. and the president is now getting new backup from two republican allies who were also in that meeting, who you may recall just last week said they did not
recall hearing those remarks. this is what they're saying now. >> the problem is, is when you get to the washington politicians, the career politicians who want to pander to their base, what we have going on here right now is a gross misrepresentation. >> are you saying the president did not use the word that has been so widely reported? >> i'm telling you he did not use that word, george, and i'm telling you it's a gross misrepresentation. >> i didn't hear that word either. i certainly didn't hear what senator durbin has said repeatedly. senator durbin has a history of representing what happens in white house meetings so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised by that. >> you're saying it did not happen or you don't recall? >> i didn't hear it and i was sitting no further away from donald trump than dick durbin was. and i know what dick durbin has said about the president's repeated statements is incorrect. >> another republican who was there, senator lindsey graham, refused to support their accounts. in an interview with the south carolina post and courier, graham told reporter jamie
lovegrove, that, quote, my memory hasn't evolved. i know what was said, and i know what i said. graham also said this today about negotiations over immigration. >> the discourse right now is pretty low. we're producing some pretty good policy, but those of us in my business need to up their game. it's pretty embarrassing when you have to take your children out of the room just to report the news. my now famous meeting with the president was about solving a problem to secure our country and to be compassionate and understanding of these 800,000 children. it's going to take you, mr. president, working with republicans and democrats to get this done. it's not going to be done on twitter, by tweeting. it's going to be done by talking and understanding. >> on that note, we turn to our leadoff panel for a monday
night, two of whom we've mentioned already. robert costa, national political reporter for "the washington post," moderator of washington week on pbs. kimberly atkins is back with us. chief washington reporter for the boston herald, and we welcome to this broadcast the aforementioned jamie lovegrove, political reporter for the post and courier, the oldest newspaper in south carolina. welcome to you all. robert, a bunch of us read your account tonight about the meeting, about the now famous meeting on immigration. for folks who have not had the pleasure or the chance, tell us your reporting on what transpired. >> where to start, brian. working alongside my colleagues josh dossy and ashley parker today, we painted a picture of what exactly happened last week. and dick durbin, the illinois democrat and senator, working with senator lindsey graham, they had a bipartisan agreement that they floated on wednesday amongst each other on capitol hill. they brought it to president
trump. he was okay, we're told by white house officials and friends of the president, with the broad strokes. but it all fell apart. conservatives inside of congress said to the president, hold up, including white house chief of staff john kelly. that deal fell apart on thursday and that's when the president made these comments, comments that have since exploded the talks about maybe having the government not shut down, having an immigration deal at the same time. >> robert, somebody on cnn said tonight, quoting a source familiar with the president's thinking that he's fine with the way it went down and the way it's been characterized. between you, ashley, and josh, tell us what you've been able to gather, again, about the president's thinking. bring us right up to the moment. >> i can back up that reporting, brian. we put in our story tonight how the president was calling his friends and advisers after the remark was reported by "the washington post," and he was asking maybe it plays well with my conservative base. maybe they're not going to break with me because of this comment. and on thursday night we report
white house officials, they weren't setting up a war room because of the vulgarity that was uttered in this oval office meeting. instead they were going to cafe milano, a fancy georgetown restaurant to toast dina powell. they were really believing the president was going to make it past this controversy as he has at times in the past. but ever since then, the immigration talks have unraveled, and that's why senator graham went on the record today with the post and courier, with "the washington post." he's so aware these talks are fragile, and the d.r.e.a.m.ers, their permits are set to expire in the coming weeks and months. this is an issue that can't be ignored in his view. >> and, jamie, noting for our viewers that you cover the senator and don't speak for him, i'm going to ask you while avoiding crossing a line into analysis, describe his level of surprise or disgust coming out of the meeting. and if you don't mind, take a
whack at the question of why senator graham has been so hard to nail down lately. he has been all over the map politically. >> yeah, you're right, brian. i think senator graham was clearly -- he was affected by thursday's meeting. there's a running joke down here in columbia that the most dangerous place to be in south carolina is in between lindsey graham and a microphone. he's normally one who is not afraid at all to talk to the media. he loves to share his thoughts as much as possible. but he went radio silent over the weekend. we got a statement from him friday afternoon about this meeting. very little else from graham or folks close to him. you know, when i talked to him this morning for about 15 minutes, he had clearly taken some time over the weekend to think about the best path forward from here, to think about how he can avoid making this episode even more damaging
to these negotiations moving forward. and the way he decided to do that is by declining to explicitly confirm these comments, but to say, you know, that my memory hasn't evolved. clearly a pointed jab at senators cotton and purdue over this. but he is very careful not to cross the line and not to reach a point of no return, to balance his frustration with what he said was a very different donald trump on thursday than what we had seen two days earlier in that televised bipartisan meeting. he doesn't want to upset the relationship that he's built for several months now. he's courted the president on the golf course. you know, this was really what it was all about, and he doesn't want to let all of that effort go to waste just over, you know, one comment that he found clearly very upsetting. >> at one point he tweeted out all but an endorsement of a trump golf property if memory
serves. hey, kim, let's bring this home to where it matters, and that is washington. in your view and based on your reporting, how doomed now is an immigration deal, and just how toxic are the politics surrounding this? >> well, i think it is very toxic. i mean i think this is demonstrating why one of the many reasons why immigration reform is so difficult. it's a political third rail. when you have comments like the president is reported to have said, that essentially throws gasoline on that third rail and makes it that politically dangerous that although you have, on policy, an issue, finding a solution to people who participated in the daca program, which is -- finding a fix for that is popular in both parties across the country. but the politics of it are so difficult that everyone has retreated into their political corners. now you have the president and
his aides saying that they are confident that the bway this is playing out with their base. you have senators cotton and purdue, who clearly were not happy with this deal and are doing everything that they can to stand along the president, be in his ear to torpedo it. and then you have other people like lindsey graham trying to walk this fine line, trying to stay within the president's circle but at the same time try to guide him to say that this is something else. i mean it's a mess, and it's all involving politics. it's no longer involving the policy. when you look at where -- there is disagreement about this deal, but when you look at where the hard-liners are and the people who came together with this compromise, the differences aren't that big. it's things like how much border security and to what extent is the visa lottery revisited in this bill, and how much of it waits until some other bill? but the politics of it are so
divisive that it's really hard to see how they come together now. >> so, robert, for at least a generation, washington's been run like a bunch of drunks, and i mean no offense to a bunch of drunks. but they're going to quit tomorrow. so what's the chance we get a government shutdown on friday, or do they kick that can down the road for another month? >> the republicans control the house and the senate, brian, so they're looking tonight at a short-term resolution to keep the government funded. they want to avoid having some kind of shutdown, but they have to have a deal. it's going to be a short-term piece of legislation that probably gets to the floor in the coming days once congress gets back. but they vrnt figured out how to get this done because with all the dynamics that have been discussed, you see senator cotton and senator purdue, and mark meadows, they are now in the president's ear, and they realize the president was tempted by the moderates like senator graham, tempted by the democrats looking for a big victory, but they said we need to be in his ear as well.
they made sure they got to the white house last week and continued to defend the president about the remark made in that meeting over the weekend because they know they have political capital. they have leverage now in these negotiations. that means there's no real agreement right now on the horizon that would pair together immigration and government funding. >> so, jamie, while south carolina doesn't look red from the air when you fly over it, it sure is on a map. while it's a diverse and fascinating state, if you have to pick a color, it's red, represented by two high-profile senators, graham and scott. how is all of this playing at home? >> well, you know, this is an issue that senator graham has been outspoken on for many years. you know, it was an issue leading into his 2014 re-election battle. folks that, you know, may put him at serious risk in the primary. it ended up being so many candidates ended up trying to challenge him that he emerged unscathed. but, you know, he has never let
the political elements of this, you know, direct his thinking and his aggressive stance on it. he has been very vocal about what he believes. he's been pursuing this for many years. he took part in that gang of eight effort that, you know, led to the downfall of other republican politicians as well. but he is a politician who, when he is backed into a corner and he is facing murky waters, you know, that's the environment he thrives in. and he is going to continue pushing for this, and, in fact, when i spoke to him this morning, he said that everything that's happened over the last few days has only made him more determined to keep moving ahead on it. so i wouldn't expect him to slow down or stop anytime soon. >> and, kim, who is the crowd inside the west wing if we are to believe that there was some twist, some turn between the publicized, live televised bipartisan meeting and the
donald trump they all encountered in the oval office? who's getting to him on this? >> i mean certainly stephen miller is no fan of this compromise deal, but i also am a little cautious to put the president's actions entirely on others. i mean clearly he is influenced by these people, but i think at the end of the day, the president changed his mind because he believed that this would be bad. this would play bad with his base. and we have seen time and time again that he is going to stick with the very policies, with the very stances that he has espoused since the campaign trail. and if this -- if he sees this as walking away from the wall he promised, walking away from cracking down on immigration, at the end of the day, i think it's up to him, and i think this is where the buck stops. >> three journalists fresh from reporting our lead story tonight. our thanks to robert costa, to kimberly atatkins, and to jamie lovegrove. thank you all for joining us and
starting us off on a monday night. coming up for us, a busy week ahead in this russia investigation with bannon heading to the hill to testify. and as we've been reporting, president trump sparking a debate on the state of race in america as we remember this day of days. plus a massive failure, a massive scare in hawaii. now the fallout begins as folks think about what could have happened. that and more when we continue.
>> thanks for having me. i never said don junior was treasonous. >> yes, you did. >> well, i certainly never said that he'd crack like an egg on tv. >> yeah, that sounds exactly like you. >> okay, that does sound like me. >> bill murray as steve bannon. fred armisen as michael wolff. "saturday night live" takes another swing at this story writ large this weekend. in real life, steve bannon will appear tomorrow before the house intelligence committee. he's one of three close trump associates the committee will question about contact that members of the campaign had with russians during the 2016 election. in just the space of a few months, let's recall bannon has lost his white house job and then his job heading breitbart news. npr characterizes bannon's current life situation this way, quote, with no radio show, no
billionaire patrons and no access to the president he helped get elected, bannon has found himself adrift on an iceberg in the night. it is this bannon, not the colossus, but the castaway, who is set to testify before the house intelligence committee about the russia imbroglio. somebody stayed up late at night writing that. nbc news has confirmed that current white house communications director hope hicks will be questioned by that same committee as early as this week. hicks has been by the president's side since day one of the campaign, was in the room where it happened for so many of those critical meetings and private conversations. former trump campaign manager co cory lewin do yandowski is also expected to testify. he talked about that in new york. >> i'm not concerned at all because i have nothing to hide. no one has ever claimed that i've done anything wrong because i never did. i never worked with any russians. i never spoke to any russians
that i am aware of. i have nothing to hide. what i want to do is make sure that if anybody did collude or cooperate to try and impact the outcome of a u.s. election, those people spend the rest of their lives in jail. >> with us tonight to talk about this, jennifer rogers, the executive director for columbia law school for the advancement of public integrity. >> and cling clint watts. welcome to you both. clint, what does it mean for the investigation that the house prong of this is getting potentially these three names in short order? >> yeah. what's interesting about it is you get a preview of what they're going to say. and really this all comes down to the mueller investigation. i think of the three, the house investigation is the weakest one. it's become very partisan. a lot of bickering back and forth. but what's interesting about these three characters is you
have someone who is on the front end, someone who is on the back end. lewandowski started, bannon finished. but hope hicks is the only constant where you go through the campaign and up to the president right now that's there. so you're really looking at witnesses that can put in context what is really a chaotic administration and a chaotic campaign. very few people stayed there the whole time, so you really have to piece things together. >> jennifer, same question with the exception of this addition. that is that to clint's point, they're also getting closer. you don't get as close as hope hicks, who's really been present since the creation. >> yeah, that's right. i mean this whole thing kind of moves in stages. you kind of start with people, and then you kind of move closer to your center. i think that's what they're doing. i also think that mueller is where we're really going to get at the heart of this, i think. i agree with clint on that. he has access to all of what's happening in all of these committees too. so, you know, as he starts to talk to people, he can actually go back to people and talk to
them again. he'll be looking at what these committees are uncovering if it's interesting to him and he can then use that in his work too. >> clint, if i appointed you chief investigator for the house committee and they closed the doors, and there is steve bannon sitting across from you, what do you want to know first and foremost? >> it would be very simple. do i believe what you're saying in this wolff book, or do you have a different take on it? >> really? >> what i want to know is what is the straight story in these cases because he basically alludes that the trump tower meeting, surely they took him up and saw president trump. and a lot of these characterizations, he calls the russia scenario treasonous. he seeps to be advocating a position that leans to the democrats in this house committee. i would want to pin him down on what he actually knows. bannon is something who is adrift as we talked about in the intro. he is someone you can push either way. is this going to be bannon the
loyal trump supporter or the one who maybe fights with the kushners? i think in terms of the investigation, you've got a lot of angles you can go. >> both lewandowski and bannon have some hard bark on them. this is not their first rodeo. they've been in a life of politics. hope hicks not yet 30 years old. starts life as a ralph lauren model, enters the trump circle by doing some web marketing for ivanka's website, and ends up part of this. she's now so close to the seat of power. it's a very different calculation having a hope hicks before your committee or your staff. >> well, you know, it really shouldn't be s, right? all three of these people should be going in and testifying under oath. there shouldn't be any kind of who's going to shade and who's going to be more capable of shading the truth. it shouldn't be that way. i think you're right. some people are more
sophisticated than other people. hope hicks, while very bright and all of that is maybe a little less knowledgeable about how these things work. she hasn't been through this ringer before. she has a long future ahead of her. she certainly doesn't want to get herself into trouble. she doesn't want to lie under oath. so, you know, maybe they will be looking to her to give a more unvarnished tale than the rest of the witnesses. i guess we'll see. >> and of course among all these people who have lawyered up, we've reported before a lot of their personal attorneys are giving them that kind of standard boilerplate correct advice. don't lie for this person who is your boss. you must go in there. the truth will set you free. and then you won't collide with the stories that we don't know other people may or may not be telling. >> that's true. you know, also lawyers sometimes say, you know, tell the truth of course but don't volunteer. answer only the questions that is put before you. don't keep going on and volunteer things. that's another thing that lawyers will say that tends to
thwart an investigation sometimes. we'll see. i'm sure all of their lawyers are giving them the right advice. i'm sure no one wants to commit perjury and lie under oath. the question sometimes comes down to how skillful is the interrogation. that's another area where i think mueller and his team are probably going to be better able to get the information they need than these committees are. >> clint, a change of topic for our last question. this got the attention of a lot of people tonight. when "the wall street journal" reported this. u.s. counterintelligence officials in early 2017 warned jared kushner that wen di deng murdoch, a prominent chinese american businesswoman could be using her close friendship with mr. kushner and his wife, ivanka trump, to further the interests of the chinese government. u.s. officials have also had concerns about a counterintelligence assessment that ms. murdoch -- this is the former now divorced wife of rupert murdoch, was lobbying for
a high profile construction project funded by the chinese government in washington, d.c. obviously i don't think you can pass judgment on the veracity of this story, but does this have the ring of your old shop and the work they would do? >> yes. i mean this campaign and all of their business ties is a counterintelligence nightmare. you know, for the fbi just looking at this, you've got business interests. we don't really know. we've never seen tax records. >> i seem to recall someone saying that. >> we haven't seen business relationships. it's a murky world where you don't know where -- there's never been so many points of influence that can come to bear. it's not a coincidence that when director mueller became the special counsel, he immediately broke ties financially. he left his firm. he did that to make sure that there was no influence or perception of that. so when you look at this, again, it's another counterintelligence lead. and every time you must ask, are they just unaware of this, or is
this just how business and influence come together? and it's quite scary because there's been so many avenues. we've seen kushner properties being put up for sale. we've seen marketing pitches. it's a dangerous situation for our country, and you don't know. do they really know if, as we've heard from the kushners, i'm new to this. we don't know how we're doing in this. as a counterintelligence professional, your ears perk up when you see these things happening. >> on behalf of our audience, we are fortunate to have two former feds here request us, jennifer rodgers, clint watts, thank you both for returning to our broadcast. another break for us. coming up, an early warning system goes seriously awry. why one of our next guests says it's worse than we even think when "the 11th hour" continues.
my "business" was going nowhere... so i built this kickin' new website with godaddy. building a website in under an hour is easy! 68% of people... ...who have built their website using gocentral, did it in... ...under an hour, and you can too. type in your business or idea. pick your favourite design. personalize it with beautiful images. and...you're done! and now business is booming. harriet, it's a double stitch not a cross stitch! build a better website - in under an hour. free to try. no credit card required. gocentral from godaddy.
while he is president of all 50 states, president trump took over 24 hours to publicly respond after an errant ballistic missile warning caused panic across the state of hawaii. "the washington post" describes the steps that led to a state of emergency. a state emergency employee sending the false alarm this way. quote, from a drop down menu on a computer program, he saw two options, test missile alert, and missile alert. he was supposed to choose the former. big difference. as much of the world now knows, he chose the latter. an initiation of a real-life
missile alert. this is what folks in hawaii saw live on their television as the alert went out. [ tone ] >> the u.s. pacific command has detected a missile threat to hawaii. a missile may impact on land or sea within minutes. this is not a drill. if you are in indoors, stay indoors. if you are outdoors, seek immediate shelter in a building. remain indoors well away from windows. if you are driving, pull safely to the side of the road and seek shelter in a building or lay on the floor. we will announce when the threat has ended. this is not a drill. >> so the way that differs from a test of the emergency broadcast system is basically the lay on the floor, and this is not a drill part. for 38 harrowing minutes on a saturday morning, upwards of a million people had reason to believe they might be living out their last moments on the great planet earth. finally a follow-up alert was sent out making clear there was no threat, but the whole false
exercise has left a whole lot of folks wondering and worrying about the possibility of an accidental retaliation someday. we have two gentlemen here to talk about this tonight. from honolulu, retired four star u.s. army general barry mccaffrey, a decorated combat veteran of two wars with vast experience in the pacific region. and we welcome to our broadcast daniel dresner, the author of several books and most recently has written about the tenure of h.r. mcmaster as national security adviser. welcome to you both. general, i'm going to start with you because not to lessen this with this phrase, but you had a consumer experience with this, staying at a resort in hawaii. take it from there. what happened? and mostly what didn't happen? >> yeah. well, you know, sort of a shocking occurrence for all of
hawaii. it was just a boneheaded error by one person with a bad system. by the way, brian, there was no backup supporting systems in place as far as i could tell. the hotels really didn't make announcements for 40 minutes. then they weren't in japanese. so we've got a problem out here. but the larger issue is civil defense isn't the answer if the north korean fire an icbm with a 250 kill oh ton thermonuclear device that goes off in a low-level explosion over the city. so we've got to talk about layering enhanced ballistic missile defenses. there's no thaad missiles here. they work. they just tested one, firing a missile from hawaii back toward alaska, and they got it. so we've got to think about putting in place active defensive measures without which, you know, the whole notion about taking cover is
sort of silly. >> so, daniel, assuming we can do better than tell people to park their cars and lie flat, i know you're of the mind that there were a few bright spots, a few -- a little bit of room for optimism in what happened here. why is that? >> well, i agree with general mccaffrey that in some ways the interesting thing about this episode was just how easy it was to trigger this false alarm. and i think given that it happened -- and i'm obviously extremely sad that it happened, you can argue it was a successful failure in the following sense. first, what strikes me as miraculous is despite the fact this alert went out, my understanding is there was not a single fatality or injury as a result of any kind of panic or reaction to this kind of alert, which if you think about it is almost contrary to how we think about these things treated in fix fiction. there was certainly panic. there was certainly fear, but
there wasn't any breakdown in social order. the other thing that's the case, i think, is that because the alert was triggered accidentally and then it took forever or what seemed like forever in terms of 40 minutes to reverse it, now you have management agency figuring out, a, what went wrong, and, b, making sure this doesn't happen again. i think this is an instance where we would rather this failure not have occurred, but given that it did occur, as general mccaffrey said, what you want to do is harden up the system. you wa >> and, general, beyond the good points the professor just made, beyond this "this is not a drill," what are the military preps that, as a veteran military man, you look at on behalf of the citizenry and the safety of the people of hawaii and elsewhere? >> well, brian, we have to
remind ourselves the north koreans have tested an icbm with a range adequate to hit all the continental united states already. they have tested a thermonuclear device that worked. it may have been in excess of 200 kill oh tons. within a fairly short period of time, two to five years, they'll have a dozen icbms that can target new york city, d.c., l.a. this is not a hawaii problem. i suspect that where we're going to be in a very short period of time is looking at the capability of launching a u.s. nuclear strike on north korea when we have warning that their attack might be imminent. no president's going to risk having 5 million americans killed or 5 million japanese or south koreans for that matter. so we're edging into some extremely dangerous territory where the only likely outcome is our deterrent policy will be
tell the north koreans if we think you're about to launch, we're going to preempt on you, and i think we would do it. >> well, that gets your attention certainly. and professor, swinging back to the good news category, it has to be good news -- correct me if i'm wrong -- that north korea has literal skin in the game here in the upcoming olympics, that they're involved and engaged, and it has precipitated talks. >> i think that's the case. i mean, you know, as much as there's been a lot of heightened rhetoric coming from the trump administration as well as certainly coming from kim jong-un about the nuclear standoff, the fact that you now have talks going on between the north and south, the fact that south korea will be hosting the olympics next month, and the fact that north korea wants to participate suggests that we probably will not have anything, you know, untoward happen at least until march. that said, i am extremely concerned about some of the rhetoric coming from the trump administration, particularly from national security adviser h.r. mcmaster in terms of
continual talks about the so-called bloody nose strike. some way to somehow launch some kind of strike against north korea for the fact that it has, you know, engaged in sort of a reckless expansion of its nuclear program. but the idea that that is somehow going to work strikes me as dangerously ill informed, and the potential for that to lead to a wider conflagration seems to be much more likely. >> sadly all wee know is we'll have some version of this conversation all over again. for now, general barry mccaffrey, professor daniel drezner, gentlemen, thank you both very much. on this day, martin luther king jr. day, as many americans take part in a day of service, the president denies charges of racism. we're going to talk politics of this day when we come back.
but he has made enough comments over the years to warrant a "new york times" opinion piece written today titled "donald trump's racism, the definitive list." here now some from that list as well as others that have made news. >> why aren't we letting people in from europe? i have many friends, many, many friends -- and nobody wants to talk this. nobody wants to say it. but trump comes along and said, birth certificate. he gave a birth certificate. whether or not that was a real certificate because a lot of people questioned it -- i certainly question it. mexico sends its people. they're not sending their best. they're bringing drugs. they're bringing crime. they're rapists. we're getting killers. we're getting drug dealers. we're getting rapists. and we're also getting, i'm sure, some good people. first of all, i love the mexican peel. i have a great relationship with mexico. how can i not love people that
give me tens of millions of dollars? donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states. look at my african-american over here. look at him. are you the greatest? do you know what i'm talking about? i've been treated very unfairly by this uj j. now, this judge is of mexican heritage. if you look at his wife, she was standing there. she had nothing to say. she probably -- maybe she wasn't allowed to have anything to say. i mean honestly places like afghanistan are safer than some of our inner cities. it's time to help the american citizens who have become refugees in their own country. these were people guilty of murder assault, rape, and all manner of violent crime. countless americans are killed by illegal immigrants because our government won't do its job. our plan favors applicants who can speak english. but you also had people that were very fine people on both
we are back and let's get into that conversation we promised. alvin tillry jr. is with us. a political science professor at northwestern university. importantly, the author of the book "between homeland and motherland, africa, u.s. foreign policy, and black leadership in america. and jonathan lemire is back with us, an msnbc political analyst. jonathan, begin with you. just a can you believe where you've been from the meeting and your shouted question at the white house, which repeated the word in question, and the president's declaration that day that this was to be a day of
work. >> right. yes. on friday certainly it's a journalism bucket list to, in the white house, yell, mr. president, did you use the phrase blank-hole when describing african nations. he ignored the question, but it came at the end of this ceremony for mlk in which he said thatten month, the holiday today is not a day of rest, is not a day of relaxing to go pal around. it's a day of service. and at least the president, that we're aware of, didn't participate in any service today. he was golfing at his course in florida before returning to washington today. and it continues this lengthy conversation. it was laid out in that montage of the president's sort of checkered history with race. and i might add pre-dating any of that, i mean the foundation of his political career in many ways was based on birtherism, the idea that the only black president this country has ever had was not born here. and therefore was ineligible to be president, which is a lie, and by most accounts, a racist
lie. >> professor, what do you make of what's happening in our country and with this president right now at this very minute? >> well, i think, brian, the issue isn't particularly whether president trump is racist or not. i think as your sound demonstrated very clear evidence of president trump engaging in racially incendiary and racist remarks. the broader issue is the silence of his party and what race has meant to the rise of the modern republican party since ronald reagan. and the fact of the matter is that, you know, there are two parties in america that are divided and polarized based on race. one is the party of multi-racial america, and one is the party of an aging, white, citizenry that is very uncomfortable with the changing pace of our society, the diversification of our society. so i don't think it's really a
question of whether mr. trump is a racist. the broader question is where is his party that likes to say they're the party of lincoln? well, they're precisely where they have been for the last 40 years, trying to gain electoral advantage by courting this element of our electorate. and that's very, very disturbing on martin luther king day and any other day. >> to our audience, our apologies. in earlier conversation got away from us on time. we've asked both these gentlemen to come back and continue the conversation we have started tonight. and that of course means professor alvin tillry jr. will come back. we'll have you on again very soon as we will jonathan lemire. gentlemen, thank you both. "the 11th hour" is back right after this. to protect themselve. i have afib. even for a nurse, it's complicated... and it puts me at higher risk of stroke. that would be devastating. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. once i got the facts, my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®...
to help keep me protected. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner... ...significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least 6 blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. for afib patients well-managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures... ...and before starting xarelto®-about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems.
flaky, little bob corker. then we got a new one just today, more specifically the senior senator from illinois, number two democrat in the senate picked up the nickname of senator dicky durbin. like the kid we all knew in school, the norm for donald trump has been to employ nicknames publicly and often in an attempt to lock them somehow into our consciousness. >> rocket man should have been handled a long time ago. little rocket man. that's why i call him big luther. everyone now is calling him big luther. crazy bernie. pocahontas. that's elizabeth warren. i call her goofy. sloppy steve. jeb bush, we call him low energy. low energy. lyin' ted. lyin' ted. lyin' ted. lie. lyin' ted. lydon telyin' ted. we got to go lyin' ted. boom. he's a lying guy, a really lying
guy. lyin' ted and little marco. little marco. i call him little marco. he's little marco rubio. little marco rubio. little marco, by the way, is a choke artist. liddle, l-i-d-d-l-e. little marco. i'm not going to say little marco. i refuse to say it. right? i refuse to say little marco. just now coming in, i watched this lightweight rubio, total lightweig lightweight. little mouth on him. bing, bing, bing. crooked hillary. she's crooked. crooked hillary clinton. crooked hillary clinton. crooked hillary clinton. who is more dishonest? crooked hillary clinton or the media? crooked, crooked, crooked hillary. or as i would call her, crooked hillary. she is a crooked one. there's no question. crooked hillary clinton. you know, that term has really stuck. everyone has calling her -- has anyone seen crooked hillary clinton today in. >> so little time, so many
nicknames bestowed upon so many different americans. it's where we will end things tonight as we start a new week here together. that is our broadcast for a monday evening. thank you so much very much for being here with tonight on "all in" -- >> no, no i'm not a racist. >> the president finally answers his critics. >> i am the least racist president you have ever interviewed. that i can tell you. >> as his allies carefully parse what he said in the oval office. >> i'm telling you, he did not use that word. >> i didn't hear that word either. >> i don't recall that specific phrase being used. >> tonight the pushback on that. >> i am stunned that this is their defense. >> and the fallout for the entire country. then the president back tracks on daca. >> i don't think the democrats want to make a deal. >> what it means as the dreamers run out of time. plus, as a spurned steve bannon heads to the hill tomorrow -- >> sloppy steve now looking for